Thank you, Eli. That's an interesting example. I've got the idea. Let's the package stay as is. Have a nice time, Mikhail. пн, 3 сент. 2018 г. в 14:07, Eli Schwartz <eschwartz@archlinux.org>:
On 9/3/18 3:25 AM, Felixoid wrote:
Good day's time Eli and Yen, I hope you are well.
First of all, Eli, thank you for the answer. You are right, and it's difficult for me to call my own "deprecation way" somehow but "stupid". I wasn't happy, of course, about it but didn't mention the proper way like "Merge request" one month ago. I'm sorry for it and for that fact that it was in AUR for almost a month.
Because of it, I've fixed the package already.
Nevertheless, Yen, polysh package contains not an only script by itself but modules in /usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/, see [1]. Regarding this, I couldn't say, that polysh doesn't provide modules. Moreover, when two months ago python was upgraded from 3.6 to 3.7, the package was broken without any hints. That's why I've thought that it's a good idea to add the prefix. IMHO, it doesn't contradict with [2].
Firefox breaks (frequently!) when "icu" is updated. Notwithstanding that it's a repository package and thusly gets rebuilt on time, does that mean that it's proper package name should be "icu-firefox" because it has a binary dependency on the icu package? Maybe it should even be renamed to
gtk3-freetype-sqlite3-fontconfig-libjpeg-libvpx-ffmpeg-nss-libpulse-pango-cairo-dbus-firefox?
Should pacman be renamed to curl-libarchive-pacman?
Should bash be renamed to readline-bash?
No, that would be silly.
-- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User